Down goes the Dow

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

danube steak wrote:

I don't need to live 130 years. I have made a killing since 2009 just buying and buying and buying. I can appreciate you are close to retirement and are wanting assets less likely to take a big loss. I am just advocating equities for those much younger than the two of us.

OK, fair point. If your 30 with $20,000 retirement, fine. On the other hand, 65 with $200,000 in life savings, no.

We certainly agree on that.

Seattle,

You are grasping at straws, and posting equally familiar ground. I don’t see how any of that is in conflict with my statement to you. At the time you quoted I was doing a simple fair value calculation. Coincidentally soon afterward the Republican tax cut enhanced corporate earning by about 10-15% changing the gross number, but not the formula. Valuations are not static. By the way, I believe the S&P 500 was 2,200 in March of 2020. And has been stick saved by the Fed several times since 2015 at the cost of $Trillions. Unimaginable amounts of money.

Hey think whatever you want.

Igy

Valuation is math, not necessarily a strategy. Just shows the market is expensive. Shiller’s CAPE 10 shows the same thing. I posted the Buffett indicator showing the same last week. The fact the market has gone up does nothing other than enforce the belief this is a historic bubble

https://www.multpl.com/shiller-pe

The market has been expensive for a long time, now,

Factors like intervention by the Fed, manipulation by the Central Bank, favorable tax law regulations, pandemic relief influx of funds, all are part of the equation, and an equation of which market fair value approximations are only one of several factors.

Your posts and the blog entries you quote from Hussman commonly carry the caveat that investors investing at these levels will lose.

It is not just math and you know that.

It is a market forecast and one that cannot escape the scrutiny of many here.

At a certain point, one can certainly wonder when it will be determined to have been misguided.

^From same thread Seattle posted.

seattle prattle wrote:

The market has been expensive for a long time, now,

Factors like intervention by the Fed, manipulation by the Central Bank, favorable tax law regulations, pandemic relief influx of funds, all are part of the equation, and an equation of which market fair value approximations are only one of several factors.

Your posts and the blog entries you quote from Hussman commonly carry the caveat that investors investing at these levels will lose.

It is not just math and you know that.

It is a market forecast and one that cannot escape the scrutiny of many here.

At a certain point, one can certainly wonder when it will be determined to have been misguided.

Take it anyway you like. Hey I may be regurgitating your posts.

Soooo, Igy was calling for an S & P of 900 or lower just 4 years ago? I repeat an S & P of 900 or lower just 4 years ago. And today it closed close to 4500. Wow, Igy. You were really, really, really wrong on that call. Oh, but I am sure you will blame that on the fed intervening or on the government or some other outside factor. Just face it - you were dead wrong as was John Hussman and all the other doomsayers.

danube steak wrote:

Soooo, Igy was calling for an S & P of 900 or lower just 4 years ago? I repeat an S & P of 900 or lower just 4 years ago. And today it closed close to 4500. Wow, Igy. You were really, really, really wrong on that call. Oh, but I am sure you will blame that on the fed intervening or on the government or some other outside factor. Just face it - you were dead wrong as was John Hussman and all the other doomsayers.

Oh, but it is going to tank very, very soon.

danube steak wrote:

Soooo, Igy was calling for an S & P of 900 or lower just 4 years ago? I repeat an S & P of 900 or lower just 4 years ago. And today it closed close to 4500. Wow, Igy. You were really, really, really wrong on that call. Oh, but I am sure you will blame that on the fed intervening or on the government or some other outside factor. Just face it - you were dead wrong as was John Hussman and all the other doomsayers.

OK. $Trillions of stimulus doesn’t matter, and the chickens never roost.😷

Future cube steak for you:

https://www.hussmanfunds.com/wp-content/uploads/comment/mc211015e.png

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

danube steak wrote:

Soooo, Igy was calling for an S & P of 900 or lower just 4 years ago? I repeat an S & P of 900 or lower just 4 years ago. And today it closed close to 4500. Wow, Igy. You were really, really, really wrong on that call. Oh, but I am sure you will blame that on the fed intervening or on the government or some other outside factor. Just face it - you were dead wrong as was John Hussman and all the other doomsayers.

OK. $Trillions of stimulus doesn’t matter, and the chickens never roost.😷

Can you ever just own what you predicted? You called an S & P of 900 or lower 4 years ago. You called it with no predictions. Now the index is up around 4,500. No trillions of stimulus. No nothing. Own what you predicted. No conditions 4 years ago. You called a 900 or lower index.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Future cube steak for you:

https://www.hussmanfunds.com/wp-content/uploads/comment/mc211015e.png

Those are valuation estimates based on the worst stock market investor ever, John Hussman. LOL.

Tube steak 4 U😷

And keep your mask on.👹

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

danube steak wrote:

Soooo, Igy was calling for an S & P of 900 or lower just 4 years ago? I repeat an S & P of 900 or lower just 4 years ago. And today it closed close to 4500. Wow, Igy. You were really, really, really wrong on that call. Oh, but I am sure you will blame that on the fed intervening or on the government or some other outside factor. Just face it - you were dead wrong as was John Hussman and all the other doomsayers.

OK. $Trillions of stimulus doesn’t matter, and the chickens never roost.😷

Stimuluses happen,

Tax breaks happen,

Central banks will intervene in times of financial crisis.

And the fact that they do matters. A lot.

Eventually things like the national debt may come back to bite us. Understood. But that isn't going to happen in the immediate future.

You can't make a prediction about an outcome and then discount the outcome because some of the cogent factors that influenced it were not in your original formula.

Change the damned formula.

Of course that is the same thing said in ever bubble. It is incorrect that anything Hussman, GMO, or any value manager espouses is not mainstream. It is your view that is some sort of revisionist finance. Is it possible that this is some new era? About as possible that $Trillions in stimulus have no negative consequences.

danube steak wrote:

I don't need to live 130 years. I have made a killing since 2009 just buying and buying and buying.

Yep. I have made a killing since 1989 just buying and buying and buying. In the big crash that encompassed 2007, 2008, 2009, the only down year for me was 2008. I bought all the way down (so stocks for CHEAP), and by the end of 2011, I was back to where I had been before the crash. Big deal.

I decided then that I was NOT going to buy any bonds later on to make my portfolio more conservative. Instead, all of my investments would be in stocks, BUT when I retire (and I already have this), I would make sure to have 3 YEARS of expenses in a liquid account not attached to the stock market.

I do not need that money for anything else. I own my home outright. I have zero debt. The ONLY purpose of that money is to tide me over in retirement in case of a BIG market crash. With that plus any Social Security I will get (if the crash happens after I am taking Social Security), I could easily make it 5 years without much sacrifice, allowing my retirement money to come back. If that were to happen, depending on how old I was then, I might not need to replenish the 3 year emergency fund.

I did not plan to have this 3 year emergency fund in place so early. Really the plan was to have it in place when both my wife and I are retired, but she still wants to work for 6 more years at her college professor job, and I will be completely retired in about 9 more months. But, with no debt and already a ton of my money going each month to retirement accounts (which we don't even need to do anymore), this money just kind of grew on its own without much trying on my part. It is possible I will find a home project to spend it on and then just build it back up before my wife retires in 6 years, but right now I have no plans to do that.

seattle prattle wrote:

The market has been expensive for a long time, now,

Factors like intervention by the Fed, manipulation by the Central Bank, favorable tax law regulations, pandemic relief influx of funds, all are part of the equation, and an equation of which market fair value approximations are only one of several factors.

Your posts and the blog entries you quote from Hussman commonly carry the caveat that investors investing at these levels will lose.

It is not just math and you know that.

It is a market forecast and one that cannot escape the scrutiny of many here.

At a certain point, one can certainly wonder when it will be determined to have been misguided.

For what is both good and bad, the stock market is manipulated and focused on by the elite in this country. The rich and powerful are going to do everything they can to ensure that the rich and powerful stay that way. It DOES make the gap between the haves and the have nots bigger and bigger (which is bad of course), but it is the reason the stock market is such a safe play over time. Nothing gets more complete and immediate focus from those in power than a sagging stock market.

I would agree with that and I bet it has to do with pension plans and the like becoming a thing of the past, and 401 K becoming the new retirement plan du jour. That is reality nowadays and the Fed knows it.

The difference between wall street and main street is well understood today, as well, and has only gotten worse. I believe the current administration has (or had) plans to close the gap, but precious little so far has transpired.

Very interesting to me, now, WA state enacting a new idea in the Long Term Care mandatory payroll contributions taking effect at the first of the year. Makes me wonder if they know something about future shortfalls and risks that we don't. I interpret it as a sign that financial health of the average worker is not so rosy, at least in the eyes a government that might get saddled with the costs if large portions of the population are not.

Interesting about Washington State. I have family and friends there. I will be interested to see what they think about that.